Call that a consensus? This is a consensus!

It looks like real scientists have just about had enough of the crap that the climate "scientists" spout.

The so called "consensus" on the anthropogenic nature of climate change, which was based on a meta-study of papers published on climate change was flawed as the vast majority of scientists who can be bothered to or are paid to, publish papers about climate change can only be bothered to or are only paid to, because they, or their patrons, feel that climate change is anthropogenic, hence it is something that man can and thus should do something about. The ‘World Climate Declaration (WCD)’ shows the consensus amongst non-climate scientists that what the climate "scientists are doing isn't real science:

Particular ire in the WCD is reserved for climate models. To believe in the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. Climate models are now central to today’s climate discussion and the scientists see this as a problem. “We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models,” says the WCD. “In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.”

The WCD also points out that the "consensus" is, to a large extent, enforced by its own adherents:

The scale of the opposition to modern day ‘settled’ climate science is remarkable, given how difficult it is in academia to raise grants for any climate research that departs from the political orthodoxy. (A full list of the signatories is available here.) Another lead author of the declaration, Professor Richard Lindzen, has called the current climate narrative “absurd”, but acknowledged that trillions of dollars and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists currently says it is not absurd.

Unfortunately, I suspect it will take more than this to change the tide of bigotry. There's none so blind as them that don't want to see.